You think American can run? Lmao
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
61 points (95.5% liked)
No Stupid Questions
47213 readers
1541 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I believe the soldiers would back the citizens but trump's private army (ICE) would defend him.
A modern revolution would be just getting a delivery driver outfit (FedEx, ups, etc) and just taking care of business on targets of opportunity.
That or small drones and hacking "self driving" cars.
::Takes notes::
I used to bullseye womp rats in my t-16 back home
Just aim for the exhaust ports!
The US is basically one big unhardened underbelly.
The US puts most of its effort into creating the appearance of strength rather than strength itself, and its been baked into the military doctrine since the 1950/60s with Korea. Copaganda (shows like 24 or Cops), the Military-Industrial-Film complex (Top gun, too many movies to list), comic book movies (good guys have to always do the more "moral" thing), the shock and awe doctrine; you can genuinely attach the US's security posture almost directly to one guy: Robert McNamara. This idea of creating the appearance of the thing being as effective as the thing is fundamental to US hegemony, and its currently falling apart. The man behind the curtain was never meant to be revealed because the theatrics were supposed to be so impressive you would never even consider trying to reveal them.
Take a look at Russias invasion of Ukraine, and consider the implications of what it means to have un-hardened infrastructure. Now the US continues to believe itself to be invulnerable in this regard, but consider, what would be the implications of an oil pipeline disruption at this current moment? Trump brags about how the US is relatively secure in regards to oil production, twice as much as the next blah blah blah.
Those pipelines run for hundreds of miles basically defenseless.
He said, as he gave out instructions on how to start Civil War 2: Electric Boogaloo.
Kind of reminds me of those frozen grape juice blocks they sold in the 1930s that did NOT contain alcohol, but gave a very specific warning on the back for the exact specific steps you absolutely shouldn't do. Because if you did complete those steps, your 100% legal nonalcoholic grape juice would ferment into illegal alcoholic wine. They're just warning you what NOT to do. Wink wink.
Saying "the US has unhardened infrastructure" is as obvious as saying "don't attack Iran, they can choke off 30% of the global economy".
Only the most obtuse and maladroit of players of the game would allow themselves to expose such glaring vulnerability.
Looks like someone got a new word of the day calendar.
maladroit
I've waited 24 years after having to look it up the first time to actually have a use for it.
I was not even aware of the Weezer album, I had to look up the definition today though.
Are they remaking Red Dawn again?
Revolutions typically only involve a small part of the population. January 6th only involved a couple thousand people and the fact they didn't massacre congress and have a successful coup as a fait accompli was more down to the lack of dedication of the coup attempt than to the successful defensive efforts of the US government.
In a more hard-fought revolution, the people that take to the front lines are typically the ones who feel physically and strategically capable of doing so. Other people can handle the logistics, planning, and propaganda.
What tactics the rebels would use is kind of unanswerable because there isn't a revolution happening tomorrow. The tactic current rebels use is to hide, train, recruit quietly, and propagandize. They choose this tactic because they know they aren't in a position to win a revolution that starts tomorrow. If we imagine a world where a revolution would happen tomorrow, we have to imagine the world being different from ours in certain ways that cause the rebels to adopt different tactics that constitute "starting a revolution".
Depending on the specific ways we imagine the world to be different, the rebels would adapt different tactics. The US military could stage a coup and arrest Trump as quickly as they kidnapped Maduro, then install an interim government to organize fair elections. There could be a surge of popular outrage resulting in swarm tactics that overwhelm key government buildings before adequate defense is raised. There could be a protracted civil war as rebels destroy military-industrial infrastructure while accepting aid from the US' many enemies, with rebels having trained in secret militias and learning more on the go.
Nice try, Trump.
Please, you think this question is some kind of honeypot?
If it was, that wouldn't work. 80% of his most loyal staff (especially the secret service) are part of the revolution, playing the long game to undermine his administration from within. Basically, everyone he truly relies on is plotting against him.
No, I thought it was a good setup for a cliche one-liner.
Stephen Miller
Who said it will be civilians
The US has 300 million people in it. If even one percent of them decided to pick up a brick and go to Washington DC there isn't an army on earth that could stop them.
Revolutions are fought by a tiny minority against another tiny minority while everyone else just tries to stay alive.
Point is, the side that wins is generally the side that has the most people in the right place.
Pretty sure in 9 out of 10 fights an A10 beats brick.
The US has 300 million people in it. If even one percent of them decided to pick up a brick and go to Washington DC there isn't an army on earth that could stop them.
Is that true? Like, it would be suicidal for anyone in Washington and out of a bunker, plus it would be a really bad idea for literally dozens of reasons, but couldn’t the military just nuke them?
That’s not a gotcha, by the way, I hope even this administration isn’t stupid enough to do that, which makes this effectively true, I’m just curious.
You’re assuming the military would take part. If there was open rebellion in the US, it would probably cause a fracture in every branch of the military. The ones who leave would likely take up arms with the rebels, bringing their strategic and tactical expertise.
The problem is the legitimate government will have the majority of production. Just because it's super hard to run a factory that is getting pounded by artillery. And just like last time the rebels will have a hard time sourcing arms and ammo.
I’m just very curious about a specific hypothetical and everyone wants to answer it in context. That’s normally a good thing and maybe I’m in the wrong community to ask this, but for this question the context is irrelevant.
Let’s say it’s not Washington who nukes them, maybe there is no military anymore, maybe it’s not even a nuke. None of the details matter.
Are 3M people overwhelming for the full capabilities of a modern government?
Nuking the capital, to save themselves from a revolution? I can't see any way that doesn't solidify the revolution
Yeah, it’s totally insane and will hopefully never happen. I’m just wondering if there really isn’t artillery that can handle 3M people trying to attack with basic projectiles.
I'm not what condition for victory would be achieved by nuking Washington DC for anyone. Seems like that would be a win for the people opposed to the existing government to me.
Getting rid of the 3M protesters.
I can make a separate post to ask about it in no stupid questions, but I’m literally just curious if humanity has the tools to manage 3M protesters with basic projectiles. I read the line in your comment and thought “wait, really?” and that’s that.
Hit and run? Yeah, but against what targets? J6 was moderately successful because they were already gathered from across the country in one place. I don’t know that you could get that much opposition that deep into DC without the regime having a lot, lot more security, and I doubt they’d be as non-lethal as they were against the bulk of the J6ers. Locally it’d be a fight against the police, National Guard, and all the Rittenhouses who have a thirst for blood and would finally have an excuse to do it assuming they’d be exonerated. Americans have enough access to guns they could revolt, but the cost will be high and the people they’d be fighting are well equipped. But I’d point out Seattle has been successful in some of their rebellions, so unless the regime was willing to send in military grade artillery and level city block, you could probably capture areas and keep cops/National Guard at bay. However, I think Trump and Kegsbreath would absolutely bomb Seattle/Portland/Chicago/LA if given a reason. Waco 2.0.
You are thinking the wrong place. Not Waco, but Tulsa 2.0. The Tulsa race massacre is more what would happen, unfortunately.
The problem with this type of violence is that when it does eventually happen, it will be the christo-fascists vs everyone that doesn't want to be forced to live their way. The morally right side of this conflict is going to have to fight the christian nationalists AND the US government. I won't submit to defeatism, but it's going to be grim.